Skip to main content
Glama
razvangirgiz

wazap-mcp

by razvangirgiz
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Search WhatsApp contacts

search_contacts
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find contacts by name or phone number to retrieve contact IDs usable as chat IDs. Supports partial name matches and digit matching on numbers.

Instructions

Find contacts by name or phone number (substring match on the name, digit match on the number). Returns contact_id values usable as chat_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results (1-50)
queryYesName fragment or phone number (at least 2 characters)
account_idNoRegistry account id (default, work, …). Omit to resolve from chat_id or message_id, or the default account.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.15.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / account_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Registry account id (default, work, …). Omit to resolve from chat_id or message_id, or the default account.",
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.9.3

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real behavioral detail: how matching is performed (substring vs digit match) and what the returned identifiers can be used for. It stops short of ordering, cross-account behavior, or limits, which keeps it out of 5 territory.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with no filler, front-loading the find operation and using the second sentence to state the return value. Every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter, read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers purpose, matching behavior, and the meaning of the returned id, which is the key piece of output information. Gaps remain around result ordering, whether the search spans accounts, and truncation behavior, but the essentials are present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and the description goes beyond it by clarifying how `query` is interpreted — substring on names and digit matching on numbers, which tells the agent that phone formatting does not matter. It adds nothing for `limit` or `account_id`, so it is not a full 5.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (Find) and resource (contacts) plus the exact matching semantics (substring on name, digit match on number) and what the output is good for. That is far more precise than a bare 'search contacts'. However, it never names or contrasts with the nearest sibling, get_contact, so an agent must infer the boundary between the two from the names alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: the note that results are 'usable as chat_id' hints at when you would reach for this tool, but there is no explicit 'use this when you know a name/phone but not the id' statement and no mention of get_contact or sync_contacts as alternatives. Adequate but leaves the agent to infer the routing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools